Peace for the World

Peace for the World
First democratic leader of Justice the Godfather of the Sri Lankan Tamil Struggle: Honourable Samuel James Veluppillai Chelvanayakam

Monday, October 12, 2015

What’s a ‘job’ worth in this “atomised” world?

Speaking at a discussion forum on Tuesday (06 October) at the Mahaweli Centre on a recently authored book by Siritunge Jayasuriya titled “80 July Strike – Analytical Report” (literally translated to English) Professor Sumanasiri Liyanage said, “In a neo liberal economy in countries like ours, there is little space for workers’ struggles. Therefore, if the strike in July 1980 was not organised with that militancy at that early period, there may have not been any strike later.” This neo liberal economic model was first tried out by the “Chicago boys” in Chile, after Allende’s democratically elected government was overthrown in a bloody military coup led by General Pinochet and the second country that tried it was perhaps Sri Lanka under Jayawardne, said Prof. Liyanage. The strike was crushed within two weeks under emergency regulations, leaving well over 47,000 out of jobs and most families destitute.
A breakout nation that broke down

logoTuesday, 13 October 2015
In 2013, the then Governor of the Central Bank Ajith Nivard Cabraal invited Ruchir Sharma, Head of Emerging Market Equities and Global Macro at Morgan Stanley Investments to deliver the Central Bank’s 63rd anniversary lecture. The title of his lecture was ‘The Prospects of Sri Lanka as a Breakout Nation’. The lecture was attended by senior staff of the bank, academics and the invited elite of commerce and industry. 
A few months earlier he had authored ‘Breakout Nations – In Search of the Next Economic Miracles’. Its cover depicting a bluish globe in a pale gold hued oyster shell said it all. It was a best seller in the US, Europe and Asia. Sanjoy Roy, the producer of the Jaipur Literary Festival who accompanied Ruchir Sharma on a Penguin Books promotion in the United States, claimed: “Every hall was packed to the brim with well-known names from business, commerce, politics, industry and academia.” 
Governor Cabraal, the chimeric Kautilya of the Mahinda Rajapaksa administration, had good and natural reasons for his exuberanceDFT-17-2 for the affirmations of the Savant from Morgan Stanley investments. Here was a prophet who shared his per capita GDP obsession and the distributional effects of economic growth. 

Fortuitous forecast for Sri Lanka
Ruchir Sharma had identified Sri Lanka as a possible breakout nation. His reasoning was music to the ears of the Governor and President Rajapaksa whose constant mantra was the rate of growth and the per capita GDP. Ruchir Sharma was saying that Sri Lanka, even during the worst years of the civil war had managed an average annual growth rate hovering around 5%. Sri Lanka while rebuilding its economy in peace time over the next decade and creating a new trade regime with neighboring countries was well poised to achieve 7-8% growth. 
Ruchir Sharma had reasons for his fortuitous forecast. President Mahinda Rajapaksa had told him: “China is my friend. India is my relation.” Ruchir Sharma concludes: “At peace, Sri Lanka finds itself in very strong position, courted by both of Asia’s emerging giants.” Then his nimble strategic mind warns: “There is some risk that the peace dividend could prove fleeting – 40% of nations that end a civil war will revert to violence within a decade.”
The purpose of this writer is to draw attention to a pivotal observation made by Sharma in his book published in 2012. His observation is spine-chilling in its eerie explosion of retrospective ‘Weltschmerz’. The Germans have a word for everything. It means ‘world pain.’
To make any sense of what Sharma has presciently painted he needs to be quoted at some length. I beg the readers to choose to endure. 
“It is conventional military wisdom that guerrilla armies can be contained or driven off but not destroyed; however, by mid-2009 the Sri Lankan Army had proved that wisdom wrong. In an all-out offensive the Army cordoned off the Tigers in their stronghold on the northern Jaffna Peninsula, and in a feat rarely repeated in the age of mobile-phone cameras, it managed to seal the entire region from outside view. Then it pulled the cordon tight until Prabhakaran, his family, and most of the senior Tiger leaders were dead, along with untold thousands of civilians. The final stages of the war were highly controversial—charges of human-rights violations still fly against both sides —but the economic impact seems clear.”
In September 2014 Ruchir Sharma addressed an investor forum in New York attended by Nivard Cabraal and Minster Sarath Amunugama. He remains bullish on Sri Lanka. “…Another thing I find positive about Sri Lanka is that it is in the geographical sweet spot and this way I think Sri Lanka has done a great job of playing China and India” [Media release CSE 17 November 2014].

"Soldiers are tools of war. You make them heroes at your peril. As in any other human institution in soldiery, there are the lazy, the diligent, the honest and the deceitful, humane and cruel, kind and the pitiless. They cannot all be heroes. The raison d’ĂȘtre of a just war is the just peace that follows it"


The OHCHR report
Ruchir Sharma is an expert on emerging markets and economic meltdowns. He is no expert on emerging political meltdowns. His strategic mind however compelled him to caution against a cataclysm that lurked in someplace. Let us fast-forward to the OHCHR report.
“On 18 May 2009, the Defence Ministry announced that LTTE leader Prabhakaran and several other senior LTTE leaders had been killed in the fighting and the Sri Lankan Government formally announced its military victory over the LTTE and complete territorial control over the entire country.”
“OISL is in possession of high resolution electronic photos of a group of dead bodies, among them clearly identifiable are Puleedevan, Nadesan, and Vineetha Nadesan, as well as a number of recognisable but unidentified men and possibly a young woman (face outside the frame of the photo). According to a forensic pathologist, the colour digital photographs are all amateur ‘trophy-type’ images which show groups of bodies, individual bodies and include images of head and shoulders. Despite their amateur nature, these photographs capture many injuries, patterns of blood flow, disturbance of clothing and post-mortem changes.”
“OISL is in possession of photographic and video material that show Balachandran Prabhakaran, the 12-year-old son of Vellupillai DFT-17-IN-INPrabhakaran, sitting in a bunker, alive and in the custody of Sri Lankan troops as well as images of the dead body of Balachandran lying on the ground beside the dead bodies of five semi-naked men. Based on the assessment of an independent forensic pathologist of the photographs, Balachandran appears to have been killed with five gunshots to the chest. One gunshot wound with soot markings indicate the weapon was fired from a distance of 60-90 cm. A witness stated he saw Balachandran alive and then saw his body with bullet wounds; he did not see Balachandran being killed.” 
“The well-known LTTE news presenter, Isaipriya, appears in several photographic and video images that suggests she was taken into custody and killed by the Sri Lankan security forces.” 
The OHCHR report is published. The final resolution co-sponsored by Sri Lanka has been adopted by acclamation. Crusade, Jijad and Dharmavijaya are synonyms for the same asininity. Ruchir Sharma has been wrong. Our Army has not managed to “seal the entire region from outside view”.

A just peace
In another place in another time Hannah Arendt wrote: “Despite all the efforts of the prosecution, everybody, could see that this man was not a ‘monster,’ but it was difficult indeed not to suspect that he was a clown.”
Soldiers are tools of war. You make them heroes at your peril. As in any other human institution in soldiery, there are the lazy, the diligent, the honest and the deceitful, humane and cruel, kind and the pitiless. They cannot all be heroes. The raison d’ĂȘtre of a just war is the just peace that follows it.

Stories about case to freeze account of son of a VVIP is untrue…


LEN logo(Lanka-e-News -12.Oct.2015, 11.45AM)  The foreign account belonging to  a young son of a politico –a VVIP in the country today, involving a sum of Rs. 14 billion ! is being heard yesterday in a West  Asian country where the account is being maintained , a weekend English newspaper reported. This news report is mendacious  , according to reports reaching Lanka e news. This same media Institution carried a Sinhala version of this report too.
A chief  of the team of investigators associated with the  government confirmed to Lanka e news , no such case is being heard  anywhere in the world yesterday. 
The foreign Envoy of that relevant country also said , there is no such case being heard , and no team of lawyers had appeared in that country from Sri Lanka in relation to such a case. Of course , it is a fact that wealth plundered of the country have been deposited in accounts of foreign countries by the Rajapakse family , and in this regard ,invetigative teams of the world Bank , the US and Sri Lanka are conducting a special probe into them .These investigations are being carried out in 6 countries , but in no newspapers of those countries have there been such a report of  a case being heard , he added.
The mendacious news report has been written ostensibly as an analysis  without making mention of names of individuals or countries , either in order to alert the guilty Rajapakses or to say there is a case where there isn’t , and later to claim the government is not doing anything in these  instances.
Through this subterfuge , this writer who is a most notorious , unscrupulous bootlicker of Rajapakses , having  acquired a tremendous notoriety in that sphere ,  is seeking to instil   a sense of disappointment  and dsgust among the people by painting a picture that the government is doing nothing useful , according to reliable sources .


---------------------------
by     (2015-10-12 06:55:39)

We Don’t Have US $500 M Bank Account In Dubai: Namal Rajapaksa


Colombo TelegraphOctober 12, 2015 
Parliamentarian Namal Rajapaksa today denied allegations that one of his family members had a bank account in Dubai with a deposit of US $500 million.
Speaking to the media on recent allegations that a son of a VVIP had a secret bank account in Dubai and former President Mahinda Rajapaksa’s sons may be involved, Namal the eldest son of
Namal and MahindaRajapaksa today said that neither he nor his brothers had any such account.
Namal Rajapaksa told media that not even his parents had such a foreign account. He described this as another attempt to discredit his family.
Media reports said that the Sri Lankan government had initiated a judicial process in Dubai requesting the government there to freeze a bank account owned by a son of a VVIP, while pointing out that the monies have been earned through illegal means.
Media reports said that the son of this VVIP was a current parliamentarian.
These reports further clarified that the account originally contained US $1 billion and after, the judicial process was initiated the owner of the account had transferred US $500 million to a bank account in another foreign country.
Speaking to the media on the issue Cabinet spokesman, Minister Rajitha Senaratne meanwhile said that officials in Dubai have already confirmed of the existence of the account.
Senarathe had earlier said that Sri Lankan investigators have located more than $2 billion that was secretly transferred to accounts in Dubai by figures close to the administration of former president Mahinda Rajapaksa.
Senaratne said the funds represented about of fifth of the total amount of so-called ‘black money’ that the authorities suspect was illicitly stashed abroad.
“We have information that more than $10 billion, more than our country’s foreign reserves, is kept outside the country by those closely related to the last government,” Senarathne had said.
Describing the accounts found in Dubai, Senaratne said: “One person from a leading family held $1.064 billion. Another account under a parliament member’s name had over $500 million and a secretary to a very important person had over $500 million jointly with another person, who is very famous for corruption.”

Controversial arms carrier belongs to Sri Lanka Shipping Company Ltd. Cargo included 813 T56, T84s and over 150,000 rounds of ammo


article_image
By Shamindra Ferdinando-October 11, 2015

The on-going investigations into a ship, ‘Avant Garde’ taken into custody for carrying weapons on the morning of Oct. 6 off Galle have taken a different turn with the revelation that the vessel, in fact, belongs to Sri Lanka Shipping Company Ltd.

Well informed sources told The Island that the Avant Garde Maritime Services (AGMS) owned by Maj. Nissanka Senadhipathi (retd) had chartered the vessel in 2012 and used it as a floating armoury overseas. Senadhipathi was serving in the elite Commando Regiment at the time of his retirement.

The vessel had been involved in a long running counter-piracy naval operation codenamed Atlanta aimed at protecting seas off the Horn of Africa and in the Western Indian Ocean. Sources said that the vessel also named Avant Garde had been returning to Sri Lanka for the first time since its departure four years back.

In answer to a question, sources said that Senadhipathi had decided to discontinue the charter and therefore the vessel was returning to the Galle harbour.

Sources said that Avant Garde had operated out of Port Sudan.

The navy said that radar positioned in the South had picked up the vessel 14 nautical miles in rainy weather. Fast Attack Craft (FACs) intercepted the vessel and brought it to the Galle harbour.

A senior navy officer told The Island that Avant Garde enterprise could have easily avoided trouble if it had declared the cargo. The official insisted that contrary to various claims the navy had the right to inspect a Sri Lankan flag carrying vessel though situation would have been different if Avant Garde carried some other flag.

The navy recovered 813 automatic weapons and over 150,000 rounds of ammunition. The weapons comprised T-56 assault rifles and T-84s.

Sri Lankan authorities are conducting investigations to find out whether Avant Garde has informed Operation Atlanta and other naval Task Forces engaged in anti-piracy missions of the transfer of weapons to Sri Lanka.

The vessel had been used as a collecting point for weapons used by Sea Marshals deployed in anti-piracy operations.

Former JVP MP Wasantha Samarasinghe of the anti-corruption front alleged that the Avant Garde had received the protection of some influential persons in the Maithripala-Wickremesinghe administration. Appearing on live Sirasa programme anchored by Chandana Sooriyabandara, on Saturday, Samarasinghe lambasted the government for failing to take punitive action against Avant Garde acting with impunity. The JVPer said that in spite of the change of government in January, Senadhipathi was continuing his project with the support of powerful individuals in the current administration.

Retired officers, Colonel Jayavi Fernando of the Special Forces and Maj. Nissanka Rajapakse joined the discussion. Both alleged that Senadhipathi had driven rivals away and taken over the lucrative assignment. All three panelists alleged that the government seemed powerless to move court against Avant Garde in spite of mounting incriminating evidence pertaining to various violations.

Colonel Fernando alleged that though the government had changed, many of those who had served the Rajapaksas remained in key positions and, therefore, justice couldn’t be expected of the new administration as well.

Authoritative sources said that there had been serious administrative lapses on the part of Avant Garde. A Sri Lankan had identified himself as the Captain of the vessel whereas the actual Captain was a Ukrainian, sources said, adding that the navy was in the process of investigating the matter. However, the police had to conduct a thorough investigation into the Avant Garde affair, sources said. The crew and some Sri Lankan Sea Marshals are detained on board the ship.

However, others said that the new government couldn’t pretend that it wasn’t aware of the anti-piracy operation undertaken by Avant Garde. "It wasn’t a secret operation. Sri Lanka benefited from the operation."

Maj. Rajapaksa alleged in Sirasa programme that the Defence Ministry had deprived him of doing business by imposing heavy payments which he couldn’t meet. According to him, certain persons created an environment to ensure that only Avant Garde could operate at the expense of its rivals.

 
SLHRC summons JMO over contradictory reports



2015-10-12
The Negombo Judicial Medical Officer (JMO) who inspected the schoolboy and the other suspect  who were previously arrested in connection with the killing of Seya Sadewmi in Kotadeniyawa has been summoned to the Human Rights Commission.

Human Rights Commissioner Priyantha Perera had recommended the Negombo JMO to report to the HRC after the commission identified that the two reports compiled by the JMO during investigations regarding the schools boy had contradictions and inconsistencies.

The President of the Ceylon Teachers Union (CTU) Mr. Joseph Stalin filed a petition with the SLHRC against arresting the schoolboy without proper evidence.

He told the Daily Mirror that affidavits made by the residents in Kotadeniyawa had also been presented before the HRC today.

The residents in their affidavits had stated that Kotadeniyawa police officers had allegedly attempted to make the school boy guilt in connection with the murder to finish the investigations soon.

The 17-year-old schoolboy, the father of one who had been arrested, their parents, ASP Gallage and the Kotadeniyawa Police OIC had attended the hearing of the petition today.

The petition had stated that the boy was illegally detained for two days in police custody, assaulted without following proper methods when detaining a schoolboy. (Piyumi Fonseka) - See more at: http://www.dailymirror.lk/91007/slhrc-summons-jmo-over-contradictory-reports#sthash.MVrtCpBM.dpuf

How Tiran Alles got SC to do his bidding through Prof. Lakshman Marasinghe!

How Tiran Alles got SC to do his bidding through Prof. Lakshman Marasinghe!

Lankanewsweb.net Oct 12, 2015
A serving judge in the Supreme Court revealed important information to Lanka News Web regarding how RADA chairman Tiran Alles has evaded arrest, despite facing accusations that could have led to his arrest ten time over.

According to the judge, SC judge Rohini Perera Marasinghe has influenced chief justice K. Sripavan to issue an interim injunction preventing the arrest of Alles. Together with the other judge Eva Wanasinghe, she had misled the CJ.
It was due to their influence that the CJ has given a three-page, lengthy ruling that prevents the arrest. For that, Rohini and Eva have betrayed the code of conduct of SC judges, said the judge who gave us the details.
On the advice of senior president’s counsel Romesh de Silva, Alles met senior professor of law Lakshman Marasinghe to obtain an opinion. Tiran baited Rohini and Eva through the former’s husband Lakshman Marasinghe. Alles has paid more than Rs. 10 million for Marasinghe’s opinion. Most part of that payment has been distributed between the two female judges.
“I don’t say the CJ (Sripavan) obtained a bribe. Sripavan is not such a person. But, I do not trust those two women. Eva may be emotionally foolish, but Rohini is a very cunning woman. If not, why waste three pages on an interim injunction? Moreover, all the others of RADA are remanded, and how come their boss has escaped?” the SC judge asked.
The case will be taken up again late November for written submissions. The judge added that Tiran’s case could be a black mark on Sripavan’s otherwise unblemished career.

Warrant issued on Ven. Gnanasara Thera

Warrant issued on Ven. Gnanasara Thera
logoOctober 12, 2015
Warrants have been issued for the arrest of General Secretary of Bodu Bala Sena (BBS) Ven. Galagoda Aththe Gnanasara Thero and two others for not appearing in the Court, this morning (12), Ada Derana reporter says.

The warrrant was issued by Fort Magistrate Priyantha Liyanage as the BBS General Secretary and the other monks did not appear in the Court in connection with two cases filed against them.

One case has been filed for allegedly obstructing a media briefing organised by the Jathika Bala Sena (JBS) at the Nippon Hotel in Colombo while the other case has been filed for making defamatory remarks against Quran opposite the Slave Island police station.
A vociferous leader turned silent



2015-10-10
There is increasingly vocal criticism internationally and here in Sri Lanka of Burma’s (Myanmar) opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi for not doing enough for the country’s democracy, and for not intervening on behalf of the country’s persecuted minorities, in particular the Rohingya Muslims. Her silence, it has been suggested, is highly unbecoming of a Nobel Peace Prize winner and champion of human rights. 

Did U.S. weapons supplied to Syrian rebels draw Russia into the conflict?

Russia continues its military operations in Syria.

By Liz Sly-October 11
BEIRUT — American antitank missiles supplied to Syrian rebels are playing an unexpectedly prominent role in shaping the Syrian battlefield, giving the conflict the semblance of a proxy war between the United States and Russia, despite President Obama’s express desire to avoid one.
The U.S.-made BGM-71 TOW missiles were delivered under a two-year-old covert program coordinated between the United States and its allies to help vetted Free Syrian Army groups in their fight against President Bashar al-Assad. Now that Russia has entered the war in support of Assad, they are taking on a greater significance than was originally intended.
So successful have they been in driving rebel gains in northwestern Syria that rebels call the missile the “Assad Tamer,” a play on the word Assad, which means lion. And in recent days they have been used with great success to slow the Russian-backed offensive aimed at recapturing ground from the rebels.
Since Wednesday, when Syrian troops launched their first offensive backed by the might of Russia’s military, dozens of videos have been posted on YouTube showing rebels firing the U.S.-made missiles at Russian-made tanks and armored vehicles belonging to the Syrian army. Appearing as twirling balls of light, they zigzag across the Syrian countryside until they find and blast their target in a ball of flame.
The rebels claim they took out 24 tanks and armored vehicles on the first day, and the toll has risen daily since then.
“It was a tank massacre,” said Capt. Mustafa Moarati, whose Tajamu al-Izza group says it destroyed seven tanks and armored vehicles Wednesday.
More missiles are on the way, he said. New supplies arrived after the Russian deployments began, he said, and the rebels’ allies have promised further deliveries soon, bringing echoes of the role played by U.S.-supplied Stinger antiaircraft missiles in forcing the Soviet Union to withdraw from Afghanistan in the 1980s.
The hits also plunged Washington into what amounts to a proxy war of sorts with Moscow, despite Obama’s insistence this month that “we’re not going to make Syria into a proxy war between the United States and Russia.”
“It’s a proxy war by happenstance,” said Jeff White of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, who counted at least 15 tanks and vehicles destroyed or disabled in one day. “The rebels happen to have a lot of TOWs in their inventory. The regime happened to attack them with Russian support. I don’t see it as a proxy war by decision.”
Whether it will become one is one of the key questions confronting the Obama administration in the wake of President Vladimir Putin’s decision to throw Russia’s support behind Assad’s regime.
The TOW missile program overseen by the CIA is entirely separate from a failed program run by the Pentagon that was intended to influence the outcome of the other war being waged in Syria, the one in the northeastern part of the country against the Islamic State.
The CIA program got underway before the Pentagon one, in early 2014, with the goal of propping up the flagging rebellion against Assad’s rule by delivering training, small arms, ammunition and the antitank missiles, which have proved instrumental in eroding the government’s key advantage over the lightly armed rebel force — its tanks and heavy armor.
Supplied mostly from stocks owned by Saudi Arabia, delivered across the Turkish border and stamped with CIA approval, the missiles were intended to fulfill another of the Obama administration’s goals in Syria — Assad’s negotiated exit from power. The plan, as described by administration officials, was to exert sufficient military pressure on Assad’s forces to persuade him to compromise — but not so much that his government would precipitously collapse and leave a dangerous power vacuum in Damascus.
Instead, the Russian military intervened to shore up the struggling Syrian army — an outcome that was not intended.
“A primary driving factor in Russia’s calculus was the realization that the Assad regime was militarily weakening and in danger of losing territory in northwestern Syria. The TOWs played an outsize role in that,” said Oubai Shahbandar, a Dubai-based consultant who used to work with the Syrian opposition.
“I think even the Americans were surprised at how successful they’ve been,” he added.
It was no accident, say U.S. officials and military analysts, that the first targets of Russian airstrikes in Syria were the locations where the rebels armed with TOW missiles have made the most substantial gains and where they most directly threaten Assad’s hold over his family’s heartland in the coastal province of Latakia.
Those areas were also where the first offensive since the Russian intervention was launched, with columns of Syrian armored vehicles and tanks setting out from government strongholds into the countryside of the provinces of Hama and Idlib.
What the TOWs have done, White said, is “offset the regime’s advantage in armor. The TOWs have cut away at that edge, and that’s what we’ve seen playing out. It’s like the Stingers in Afghanistan.”
It is unclear whether the TOWs will be able to change the course of the war, as did the Stinger antiaircraft missiles introduced in the 1980s by the CIA in Afghanistan, where they were used by the mujahideen to shoot down Russian helicopters and paralyze the Soviet army.
Now that the Russians have introduced more intensive and heavier airstrikes and, for the first time, combat helicopters have been seen in videos strafing villages in the Hama area, the TOW missiles may only be able to slow, but not block, government advances.
The rebels have appealed for the delivery of Stinger missiles or their equivalents to counter the new threat from the air, but U.S. officials say that is unlikely. The Obama administration has repeatedly vetoed past requests from the rebels, as well as their Turkish and Saudi allies, for the delivery of antiaircraft missiles, out of concerns that they could fall into extremist hands.
But the TOW missile program is already in progress, and all the indications are that it will continue. Saudi Arabia, the chief supplier, has pledged a “military” response to the Russian incursion, and rebel commanders say they have been assured more will arrive imminently.
Under the terms of the program, the missiles are delivered in limited quantities, and the rebel groups must return the used canisters to secure more, to avoid stockpiling or resale.
The system appears to have helped prevent the missiles from falling into extremist hands. Robert Ford, who was serving as U.S. envoy to Syria when the program got underway, said he was aware of only two TOWs obtained by the al-Qaeda affiliate Jabhat al-Nusra, while “dozens and dozens” have been fired by moderate groups.
“Nusra made a big public display of having these two missiles,” said Ford, who is now a fellow at the Middle East Institute. Had they acquired more, he said, “they would be using them now.”
The supplies of the missiles, manufactured by Raytheon, are sourced mainly from stocks owned by the Saudi government, which purchased 13,795 of themin 2013, for expected delivery this year, according to Defense Department documents informing Congress of the sale. Because end-user agreements require that the buyer inform the United States of their ultimate destination, U.S. approval is implicit, said Shahbandar, a former Pentagon adviser.
But no decision is required from the Obama administration for the program to continue, Shahbandar said. “It doesn’t need an American green light. A yellow light is enough,” he said. “It’s a covert effort and it’s technically deniable, but that’s what proxy wars are.”

Putin wins no friends in overture to Assad enemies

Russian President Vladimir Putin answers questions by Russia 1 channel's anchor Vladimir Solovyov (not pictured) during an interview in Sochi, Russia, October 10, 2015.  REUTERS/Alexei Nikolsky/RIA Novosti/KremlinRussian President Vladimir Putin answers questions by Russia 1 channel's anchor Vladimir Solovyov (not pictured) during an interview in Sochi, Russia, October 10, 2015.
Reuters BY JOHN DAVISON-Mon Oct 12, 2015
President Vladimir Putin's overture to opponents of Russia's bombing campaign in Syria was snubbed on Monday, with Saudi sources saying they had warned the Kremlin leader of dangerous consequences and Europe issuing its strongest criticism yet.
Nearly two weeks since joining the 4-year-old war in Syria, Putin took his biggest step to win over regional opponents, meeting Saudi Defence Minister Mohammed bin Salman on the sidelines of a Formula One race in a Russian resort on Sunday.
Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said on Monday that those talks, along with discussions with the United States, had yielded progress on the conflict, although Moscow, Washington and Riyadh did not agree in full "as yet".
But a Saudi source said the defence minister, a son of the Saudi king and one of the chief architects of its regional policy, had told Putin that Russia's intervention would escalate the war and inspire militants from around the world to go fight.
Riyadh would continue to support Assad's opponents and demand that the Syrian leader leave power, the source said, speaking on condition of anonymity while describing the talks with the Russians.
European foreign ministers, meeting in Luxembourg, issued a statement calling on Moscow to halt its bombing of Assad's moderate enemies immediately.
"The recent Russian military attacks ... are of deep concern and must cease immediately," ministers said in their most strongly-worded statement on Russia's intervention in a war which has claimed the lives of 250,000 people and caused a refugee crisis in neighbouring countries and Europe.
"The military escalation risks prolonging the conflict, undermining a political process, aggravating the humanitarian situation and increasing radicalisation," said the ministers.
Moscow says it is targetting only banned terrorist groups in Syria, primarily Islamic State. In its daily briefings, it describes all of the targets it strikes as belonging to Islamic State, although most of them have taken place in parts of the country held by other opposition groups, including many that are supported by Arab states, Turkey and the West.

FIERCEST CLASHES
For the first time since World War Two, Russian forces are flying combat missions in the same air space as Americans, who are leading a military coalition of Western and regional countries that is also bombing Islamic State.
Those countries say Assad's presence makes the situation worse and he must leave power in any peace settlement. They accuse Moscow of using Islamic State as a pretext to bomb other enemies of Assad, charge denied by Russia.
Syrian forces and their allies from the Lebanese Shi'ite militia Hezbollah, backed by Iranian military officers, have launched a massive ground offensive in coordination with the Russian air support.
They fought their fiercest clashes on Monday since the assault began, advancing in strategically important territory near the north-south highway linking Syria's main cities.
Russian warplanes carried out at least 30 air strikes on the town of Kafr Nabuda in Hama province in western Syria, and hundreds of shells hit the area as the Syrian army and Hezbollah fighters seized part of it, according to the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, which monitors the conflict.
The Observatory and Lebanon-based al-Mayadeen television station said the pro-government forces captured the southern part of the town on Monday.
"These are the most violent battles in the northern countryside (of Hama) since the start of joint operations several days ago" between the Russian air force and Syrian ground forces, said the Observatory's Rami Abdulrahman.

STRATEGIC HIGHWAY
Syria's army chief of staff was cited by the state news agency as saying forces had taken control of Kafr Nabuda. Capturing the town would bring government forces closer to insurgent-held positions along the main highway that links Syria's main cities.
Russia said it carried out 55 sorties and hit 53 of what it described as Islamic State targets in the last 24 hours.
The Syrian army and Hezbollah on Sunday took control of Tal Skik on the other side of the highway in southern Idlib province. Many of Russia's air strikes have hit the surrounding area, which also lies east of Assad's stronghold Latakia.
The Russian intervention in Syria has wrongfooted the U.S. administration of President Barack Obama, which has been trying to defeat Islamic State while still calling for Assad's downfall.
Last week, Washington shelved a programme to train and equip "moderate" rebels opposed to Assad who would join the fight against Islamic State. The only group on the ground to have success against Islamic State while cooperating with the U.S.-led coalition is a Kurdish militia, the YPG, which has carved out an autonomous zone in northern Syria and advanced deep into Islamic State's stronghold Raqqa province.
On Monday, the YPG announced a new alliance with small groups of Arab fighters, which could help deflect criticism that it fights only on behalf of Kurds. Washington has indicated that it could direct funding and weapons to Arab commanders on the ground who cooperate with the YPG.
(Additional reporting by William Maclean in Dubai, Tom Perry in Beirut, Gabriela Baczynska in Moscow and Robin Emmott in Luxembourg; Writing by Peter Graff, editing by Peter Millership)

Who Is a Better Strategist: Obama or Putin?

Pitting a former KGB agent against a former community organizer and seeing what happens in Syria.
Who Is a Better Strategist: Obama or Putin?

BY STEPHEN M. WALT-OCTOBER 9, 2015
Who’s the better grand strategist: Barack Obama or Vladimir Putin?
That’s not quite the right question, of course, because both leaders depend to some degree on intelligence reports and advice from trusted advisors and not just their own judgment. Accordingly, any assessment of their relative performance is to some degree an evaluation not just of the individual leaders but also their respective foreign-policy brain trusts. Still, the buck does stop at the top, and Russia’s recent move into Syria has a lot of people wondering if the Kremlin has outflanked, outwitted, and outgunned the White House once again.
Is this really true? Has the crafty former KGB officer done a number on the former law professor and community organizer? And what does this latest turn of events tell us about each country’s ability to formulate and implement an effective foreign policy?
One way to address this question is to take a broader look at how each country has fared over the past seven years or so. Putin’s record looked pretty good for awhile: The Russian economy grew rapidly through 2012 (due to high oil and commodity prices), it gained entry into the World Trade Organization, and the so-called “reset” restored a degree of cordiality to the strained relationship between Washington and Moscow. But Putin’s overall record since looks much less impressive: The Russian economy is now in a serious recession, while America’s is chugging along reasonably well. And consider this: Russia’s 2014 GDP was less than $2 trillion, so over the past six years the US economy grew by an amount larger than Russia’s entire economy. The U.S. economy is also far more diverse and resilient.
Equally important, the United States hasn’t lost any key allies over the past seven years and its relations with a number of countries (e.g., India, Vietnam, etc.) have improved significantly. Russia and China are cooperating a bit more but are hardly close allies while the Ukraine crisis has damaged relations with Europe significantly and gotten Russia suspended from the G-8. The United States just signed a massive trade deal with an array of Asian partners, whereas Putin’s efforts to build a “Eurasian Economic Union” have been mostly stillborn. And the fact that Putin felt compelled to bail out the Assad regime in Syria tells us that its overall position in the Middle East is tenuous.
By contrast, and despite some recent frictions, the United States still has close ties with Israel, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Jordan, Bahrain, and the UAE, and its acrimonious relationship with long-time adversary Iran is somewhat better. Bottom line: You’d much rather be playing America’s hand, and any fair-minded assessment has to give Obama and his team some grudging credit for continuing to build useful relationships abroad and for avoiding the costly quagmires that George W. Bush and the neocons plunged into with panicky and ignorant abandon.
And yet, it is hard to escape the impression that Putin has been playing his weak hand better than Obama has played his strong one. These perceptions arise in part because Obama inherited several foreign-policy debacles, and it’s hard to abandon a bunch of failed projects without being accused of retreating. Obama’s main mistake was not going far enough to liquidate the unsound positions bequeathed by his predecessor: He should have gotten out of Afghanistan faster and never done regime change in Libya at all. By contrast, Putin looks successful at first glance because Russia is playing a more active role than it did back when it was largely prostrate. Given where Russia was in 1995 or even 2000, there was nowhere to go but up.
But Putin has also done one thing right: He has pursued simple objectives that were fairly easy to achieve and that played to Russia’s modest strengths. In Ukraine, he had one overriding goal: to prevent that country from moving closer to the EU, eventually becoming a full member, and then joining NATO. He wasn’t interested in trying to reincorporate all of Ukraine or turn it into a clone of Russia, and the “frozen conflict” that now exists there is sufficient to achieve his core goal. This essentially negative objective was not that hard to accomplish because Ukraine was corrupt, internally divided, and right next door to Russia. These features made it easy for Putin to use a modest degree of force and hard for anyone else to respond without starting a cycle of escalation they could not win.
Putin’s goals in Syria are equally simple, realistic, and aligned with Russia’s limited means. He wants to preserve the Assad regime as a meaningful political entity so that it remains an avenue of Russian influence and a part of any future political settlement. He’s not trying to conquer Syria, restore the Alawites to full control over the entire country, defeat the Islamic State, or eliminate all Iranian influence. And he’s certainly not pursuing some sort of quixotic dream of building democracy there. A limited deployment of Russian airpower and a handful of “volunteers” may suffice to keep Assad from being defeated, especially if the United States and others eventually adopt a more realistic approach to the conflict as well.
By contrast, U.S. goals toward both of these conflicts have been a combination of wishful thinking and strategic contradictions. In Ukraine, a familiar alliance of neocon fantasists (e.g., Assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland) and liberal internationalists convinced themselves that the EU Accession Agreement was a purely benign act whose virtues and alleged neutrality no one could possibly misconstrue. As a result, they were completely blindsided when Moscow kept using the realpolitik playbook and saw the whole matter very differently. (There was an element of hypocrisy and blindness here, too; Russia was simply acting the same way the United States has long acted when dealing with the Western Hemisphere, but somehow U.S. officials managed to ignore the clear warnings that Moscow had given.) Moreover, the core Western objective — creating a well-functioning democratic Ukrainian state — was a laudable but hugely demanding task from the very beginning, whereas Putin’s far more limited goal — keeping Ukraine out of NATO — was comparatively easy.
Needless to say, U.S. policy in Syria has been even more muddled. Since the uprising first began, Washington has been vainly trying to achieve a series of difficult and incompatible goals. It says, “Assad must go,” but it doesn’t wantany jihadi groups (i.e., the only people who are really fighting Assad) to replace him. It wants to “degrade and destroy ISIS,” but it also wants to make sure anti-Islamic State groups like al-Nusra Front don’t succeed. It is relying on Kurdish fighters to help deal with the Islamic State, but it wants Turkey to help, too, and Turkey opposes any steps that might stoke the fires of Kurdish nationalism. So the United States has been searching in vain for “politically correct” Syrian rebels — those ever-elusive “moderates” — and it has yet to find more than a handful. And apart from wanting Assad gone, the long-term U.S. vision for Syria’s future was never clear. Given all this muddled direction, is it any wonder Putin’s actions look bold and decisive while Obama’s seem confused?
This difference is partly structural: Because Russia is much weaker than the United States (and destined to grow even weaker over time), it has to play its remaining cards carefully and pursue only vital objectives that are achievable at modest cost. The United States has vastly more resources to throw at global problems, and its favorable geopolitical position allows it to avoid most of the repercussions of its mistakes. Add to that the tendency of both neoconservatives and liberal internationalists to believe that spreading the gospel of “freedom” around the world is necessary, easy to do, and won’t generate unintended consequences or serious resistance, and you have a recipe for an overly ambitious yet under-resourced set of policy initiatives. Needless to say, this is the perfect recipe for recurring failure.
In other words, Putin looks more successful because his goals are commensurate with his limited resources. He likes to complain about American hegemony, but you don’t hear him making highfalutin speeches about how it is Russia’s destiny to exert “leadership” over the entire planet. America’s power and core geographic security allow its leaders to set ambitious goals, but actually achieving most of them isn’t essential to U.S. security or prosperity. Sometimes U.S. diplomacy succeeds in spite of ourselves (e.g., the Iran nuclear deal, TPP, etc.), but often it drags us into conflicts and complications that we can neither win nor walk away from.
So who’s the better strategist? On one side, Obama does have an underlying sense of realism and understands that U.S. interests in many places are limited. He also grasps that our capacity to dictate outcomes is equally constrained, especially when it involves complicated matters of social engineering in divided societies very different from our own. In other words: Nation-building is expensive, goddamn hard, and for the most part unnecessary. But he has to lead a foreign-policy establishment that is addicted to “global leadership” — if only to keep giving itself something to do — and he faces an opposition party that derides any form of “inaction,” even when its proposed alternatives are “mumbo-jumbo.”
Putin, by contrast, has done a better job of matching his goals to the resources he has available, which is one of the hallmarks of a good strategist. His failing is that it’s all short-term and essentially defensive; he is fighting a series of rearguard actions designed to prevent Russia’s global position from deteriorating further, instead of pursuing a program that might enhance Russia’s power and status over the longer term.
So let’s call it a tie. The real losers, alas, are the unfortunate people in Ukraine, Syria, and several other places.
ALEXEI NIKOLSKY/AFP/GettyImages
Opposition slams 'political coup' in Iraqi Kurdistan 

A political crisis is engulfing Iraqi Kurdistan after President Massud Barzani's term in office expired without him stepping down 


Monday 12 October 2015 16:56 UTC
Several Iraqi Kurdish politicians were barred from reaching their offices on Monday, in what the opposition called a "political coup" by the autonomous region's president.
The crisis came after days of violent protests against acting president Massud Barzani, whose mandate expired in August. His camp has accused the opposition Gorran party of inciting unrest.
Yusuf Mohammed, the speaker of the regional parliament and a Gorran party member, was stopped on the road to regional capital Arbil by security forces loyal to Barzani.
Barzani's Kurdistan Democratic Party (KDP) controls the west and north of the region while opposition parties, including Gorran, have most of their support base in the south.
"Everything that happened today and yesterday is a dangerous development for the political process in Kurdistan," Mohammed told reporters in Sulaimaniyah, the main city in the south.
Five Gorran MPs were with him when KDP security forces blocked them on the road to Erbil. They had been warned by KDP members on Sunday not to show up for work the next day.
"The forces that stopped us from entering Erbil would have been enough to liberate Shingal," he said, using the Kurdish name for the city of Sinjar, the main hub of Iraq's Yazidi minority which has been controlled by the Islamic State group since 2014.
Hoshyar Abdallah, a Gorran member of the federal Iraqi parliament in Baghdad, accused the KDP of being "irresponsible" and Barzani of clinging to power.
"It's like a coup against the rule of law and democracy," he told AFP. "It's an egregious political act... We urge Kurdish political parties to come together to solve this."
The Patriotic Union of Kurdistan (PUK), which fought a bitter civil war against the KDP in the 1990s, also condemned the measures against Gorran.
"What the KDP did is like a political coup, it is not acceptable," said PUK lawmaker Ala Talabani. "I hope there will be a peaceful solution."
Four people were killed in the past few days when what began as demonstrations demanding the salaries of civil servants be paid turned into violent protests against Barzani.
Several KDP offices in southern Kurdish towns were torched.

Spectre of past strife

Masrour Barzani, who is the regional government's intelligence chief as well as the president's son, accused Gorran of having a "deliberate plan... to incite hatred and violence".
Hemin Hawrami, a senior member of the KDP, said on social media Monday he considered Gorran to be "no longer in government".
Small protests were held Monday in Sulaimaniyah and in Halabja, mostly by teachers demanding their salaries.
The Sulaimaniyah governorate's spokesperson Honer Tawfiq said the regional government had begun paying teachers their July salaries on Monday.
"The main reason for this crisis is Massud Barzani, who refuses to budge," said Hoshyar Abdallah.
The 69-year-old Barzani served two terms and a two-year extension Kurdish parties agreed to in 2013 which expired on 19 August. No deal was found for his succession.
Barzani wants to stay on, arguing his leadership is required to steer the region as its peshmerga forces play a significant role in battling the Islamic State group.
Asos Hardi, a Kurdish analyst, said the crisis revealed the weakness of the Kurdish political system.
"When the legal institutions are unable to solve such a crisis, the people on the street lose faith in their leaders' ability to steer the region," he said.
Yerevan Saeed, a Washington-based Kurdish affairs analyst, said the physical division resurfacing in Kurdistan was a dangerous development.
"The risk of civil strife is indeed there and it seems that Kurdish parties have not learned from the past," he said.
The KDP and PUK fought a bitter civil war in the mid-1990s and subsequently ran parallel administrations, dividing the region in two.